Intellectual Dishonesty

[mamooth]

Net neutrality was just a scam designed to give government control over the Internet. It's a massive increase in government.

Just as I predicted. You're so into the authoritarianism, you're actually stooping to claiming that laws against censorship are censorship.

It's all you're capable of. You're one of the most shameless and utterly devoted partisan hacks on the board, a party apparatchik who would never even dream of contradicting DerParteiRepublikkan in any way. TheParty speaks, you automatically agree and sing their praises. TheParty says censorship is good, so you're going into contortions to proclaim why censorship is the most wonderful thing ever. It's the same with every issue. Your Stalinist party always pushes authoritarianism in some manner, and you're always jumping through hoops to tell us why the authoritarianism is actually liberty, and the liberty is actually authoritarianism. Your mentors (Stalin, Goebbels and Alinsky) would be so proud of you.

Your fantasy economics are also particularly hilarious. You clearly have no idea what a free market is, and how it is that you're working so hard to destroy free markets and replace it with your party's brand of socialism. That's in contrast to us liberals, the ideological heirs of Adam Smith and the saviors of capitalism.

 

[P@triot]

Net neutrality was just a scam designed to give government control over the Internet. It's a massive increase in government.

Just as I predicted. You're so into the authoritarianism, you're actually stooping to claiming that laws against censorship are censorship.

How could Bri be into "authoritarianism" when that is exclusively left-wing, snowflake? We've already established that much (remember - that's when you ran with your tail between your legs?). I think you're so obsessed with your authoritarian desires that you see it everywhere.

 

[P@triot]

Libertarianism is Right Of Conservatism.

And yet desperate and ashamed mamooth will try to convince everyone that libertarianism is to the left of conservatism - if not left-wing.

People are clueless. Half of you have no business discussing Geopolitics on this forum.

That perfectly describes mamooth

 

[P@triot]

A quick example, liberals supported Net Neutrality, which prevented net censorship by internet providers. Conservatives want to kill that, and all of them support allowing censorship.

"Net censorship by internet providers"

You clearly have no clue what "Net Neutrality" was. Here is a quick overview:

That same year, T-Mobile introduced a “Binge On” plan, which offered customers unlimited data on some video options including Netflix, HBO, and Hulu.

While then-FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler called the “Binge On” plan “innovative,” progressive activists thought the plan was a clear violation of the brand new net neutrality regulations and lobbied the FCC to kill the plan.

It's impossible to overstate how idiotic that is. Customers could get unlimited data with T-Mobile for streaming some of their favorite content providers - why the fuck would the left give a damn what T-Mobile is offering?!?

But it didn't stop there. T-Mobile didn't need the left-wing headaches of the Gastapo so they changed the plan - at the expense of the customer.

But before the FCC could act, T-Mobile ended Binge On and created a new plan called “Uncarrier,” which allows customers to download all the data they want, but charges an extra $25 to upgrade the quality of video from 480p to HD quality.

Progressive activists went crazy again, calling this new plan another violation of the FCC’s new net neutrality regulations.

You fascists are 50 fucking shades of crazy. It went from $0 per month for customers to $25 per month for customers and that still wasn't good enough for you fascists. There is nothing "neutral" about Net Neutrality anymore than there is anything "affordable" about the Affordable Healthcare Act. It's all false advertising designed to get left-wing fascists control.

Net Neutrality Is On the Outs. This Bill Would Repeal It for Good.

 

[mamooth]

How could Bri be into "authoritarianism" when that is exclusively left-wing, snowflake?

Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo.

Notice how not even your fellow righties are willing to climb on board your stupid wagon? That's how crazy you sound. You're the internet equivalent of that mumbling schizophrenic homeless guy who told me he was the mayor.

We've already established that much

Where you define "we" as "me and the voices in my head".

You understand that you have delusions of adequacy, right? Don't worry. Everyone else does. You're just comic relief here.

 

[bripat9643]

How could Bri be into "authoritarianism" when that is exclusively left-wing, snowflake?

Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo.

Notice how not even your fellow righties are willing to climb on board your stupid wagon? That's how crazy you sound. You're the internet equivalent of that mumbling schizophrenic homeless guy who told me he was the mayor.

Notice how you didn't answer the question? How does the absence of any government censorship mean the government is censoring?

We've already established that much

Where you define "we" as "me and the voices in my head".

You understand that you have delusions of adequacy, right? Don't worry. Everyone else does. You're just comic relief here.

Have you got anything other than the lowest gutter personal attacks?

 

[mamooth]

Notice how you didn't answer the question? How does the absence of any government censorship mean the government is censoring?

That's not the question. The question is "Why do you think laws prohibiting censorship are censorship?".

You want to make it legal for near-monopolies, entities that almost are a government, to put content they don't approve of in the slow lane. That's censorship.

 

[bripat9643]

Notice how you didn't answer the question? How does the absence of any government censorship mean the government is censoring?

That's not the question. The question is "Why do you think laws prohibiting censorship are censorship?".

You want to make it legal for near-monopolies, entities that almost are a government, to put content they don't approve of in the slow lane. That's censorship.

Preventing censorship only requires the government to refrain from censorship. It doesn't require any laws to prevent it, other than the First Amendment. Any law claiming to prevent censorship is obviously a fraud. Verizon is far from a monopoly. What the government is now doing is preventing internet providers from giving their customers better service.

 

[P@triot]

The left has worked really hard to rewrite history. Live everything else they do, they have failed...